Paper · 2019 · Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science

Forage legumes for future dry climates: Lower relative biomass losses of minor forage legumes compared to Trifolium repens under conditions of periodic drought stress

Martin Komainda; Kai Küchenmeister; Frank Küchenmeister; et al.

6
claims
9
verbatim quotes
27
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Abstract Dairy livestock production systems rely on high‐quality forage legumes, which are widely present in grassland swards all over Europe. A future climatic scenario with higher average annual temperatures and lower precipitation is expected to affect grassland productivity in general and the productivity of the most important forage legume species Trifolium repens in particular. One way to cope with such constraints is the adoption of currently underutilized minor legume species with a higher tolerance towards drought stress. Therefore, the present study investigated legume species with lower moisture requirements than T. repens , these are Lotus corniculatus, Medicago falcata, Medicago lupulina and Onobrychis viciifolia in comparison with T. repens . Legumes were grown in containers as monocultures in a roofed open‐sided greenhouse under conditions of optimal water supply or periodic drought stress. Generally, drought stress decreased the biomass production, but species differed in their reaction. Particularly, M. lupulina and L. corniculatus had lower relative biomass losses (−26%) compared to T. repens (−43%, as averaged over drought stress periods). However, in overall biomass production T. repens still was at one level with M. lupulina and L. corniculatus under drought stress. This was related to high stomata control as indicated by the intrinsic water‐use efficiency. We conclude that there are promising future options of forage legumes as alternatives to T. repens .

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Periodic drought decreased legume biomass production.

Taxon
forage legumest0
Treatment
drought stresse0
Outcome
biomass productione0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Generally, drought stress decreased the biomass production, but species differed in their reaction.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 919–1018 · show in text ↑
t0

“forage legumes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Medicago lupulina had a 26% relative biomass loss under drought, lower than Trifolium repens.

Taxon
M. lupulinaMedicago lupulinae0
Treatment
drought stress periodse0
Outcome
relative biomass lossese0
Direction
lowere0
Value
−26%e0
Qualifier
−43%e0
Comparator
T. repense0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Medicago lupulina
Medicago lupulina · TaxonAnRo0002 · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“M. lupulina and L. corniculatus had lower relative biomass losses (−26%) compared to T. repens (−43%, as averaged over drought stress periods)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1175 · show in text ↑
e1

“Medicago lupulina”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–709 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lotus corniculatus had a 26% relative biomass loss under drought, lower than Trifolium repens.

Taxon
L. corniculatusLotus corniculatuse0
Treatment
drought stress periodse0
Outcome
relative biomass lossese0
Direction
lowere0
Value
−26%e0
Qualifier
−43%e0
Comparator
T. repense0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lotus corniculatus
Lotus corniculatus · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“M. lupulina and L. corniculatus had lower relative biomass losses (−26%) compared to T. repens (−43%, as averaged over drought stress periods)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1033–1175 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Trifolium repens had a 43% relative biomass loss under drought.

Taxon
T. repensTrifolium repense0
Outcome
−43%e0
Value
−43%e0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Trifolium repens
Trifolium repens · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared to T. repens (−43%, as averaged over drought stress periods)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1106–1175 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under drought, Trifolium repens biomass production was at the same level as Medicago lupulina and Lotus corniculatus.

Taxon
T. repensTrifolium repense0
Treatment
drought stresse0
Outcome
at one levele0
Direction
at one levele0
Comparator
M. lupulina and L. corniculatuse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Trifolium repens
Trifolium repens · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“T. repens still was at one level with M. lupulina and L. corniculatus under drought stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1216–1306 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The comparable drought biomass production was related to high stomata control indicated by intrinsic water-use efficiency.

Taxon
Trifolium repensTrifolium repenst0
Outcome
intrinsic water‐use efficiencye0
Qualifier
high stomata controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Trifolium repens
Trifolium repens · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“This was related to high stomata control as indicated by the intrinsic water‐use efficiency.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1308–1400 · show in text ↑
t0

“Trifolium repens”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–122 · show in text ↑

drought · growth · Medicago lupulinaPositive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

drought · growth · Lotus corniculatusPositive and negative results

7 papers: 3 positive, 4 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.